Woman Refuses To Rent Apt. to National Guardsman

[mcurrier]

People like this suck!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/05/national-guardsman-claims-boston-landlady-refused-to-rent-to-him-over-war/

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view/20220604vet_outta_here_guardsman_peace-loving_landlady__are_at_odds_over_apartment_rental/srvc=home&position=also

"But Morgan claims the woman later told him in a message left on his phone that renting to him would be problematic, saying, "We are very adamant about our beliefs," according to the newspaper.

"It just is not going to be comfortable for us without a doubt. It probably would be better for you to look for a place that is a little bit less politically active and controversial," Morgan claims Roberts said, according to his complaint -- a copy of which was obtained by the Herald."

Yet, in this case which I've been following for over 5 years, the 'beliefs' of these independent business owners are completely discarded.

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/court-says-gay-rights-trump-religious-rights.html

Typical liberal hypocrisy and double-standard.

[DaveTN]

Sgt. Joel Morgan and anyone else that has served should be proud of the service they have given their country.

But you can’t fix ignorance and hate. This woman has the right to refuse to rent to whoever she pleases as long as they are not a protected group. We all served to protect rights; even the ones we don’t believe in. Unfortunately we are not a protected group.

When our troops came home from Vietnam they were spit on in airports and on the street.

Sgt. Morgan, if I were you I would hold my head high and drop this lawsuit. This woman doesn’t deserve your time or energy; she is a moron. Don’t let her be a martyr.

I’m sure since this story was posted you have had many offers of a place to rent from decent Americans who appreciate what you did. And although people like this woman would never serve, they are the type to scream the loudest when they think someone has violated one of the rights you served to protect.

Thank you for your service.

Edited June 5, 2012 by DaveTN

[Timestepper]

Sgt. Joel Morgan and anyone else that has served should be proud of the service they have given their country.

But you can’t fix ignorance and hate. This woman has the right to refuse to rent to whoever she pleases as long as they are not a protected group. We all served to protect rights; even the ones we don’t believe in. Unfortunately we are not a protected group.

When our troops came home from Vietnam they were spit on in airports and on the street.

Sgt. Morgan, if I were you I would hold my head high and drop this lawsuit. This woman doesn’t deserve your time or energy; she is a moron. Don’t let her be a martyr.

I’m sure since this story was posted you have had many offers of a place to rent from decent Americans who appreciate what you did. And although people like this woman would never serve, they are the type to scream the loudest when they think someone has violated one of the rights you served to protect.

Thank you for your service.

Very well said, Sir!

:usa:

[DaveS]

Sgt. Joel Morgan and anyone else that has served should be proud of the service they have given their country.

But you can’t fix ignorance and hate. This woman has the right to refuse to rent to whoever she pleases as long as they are not a protected group. We all served to protect rights; even the ones we don’t believe in. Unfortunately we are not a protected group.

When our troops came home from Vietnam they were spit on in airports and on the street.

Sgt. Morgan, if I were you I would hold my head high and drop this lawsuit. This woman doesn’t deserve your time or energy; she is a moron. Don’t let her be a martyr.

I’m sure since this story was posted you have had many offers of a place to rent from decent Americans who appreciate what you did. And although people like this woman would never serve, they are the type to scream the loudest when they think someone has violated one of the rights you served to protect.

Thank you for your service.

Sir; You said it all!!!

[TMF]

Is this not a violation of the Soldiers and Sailors act? He is still a Guardsman. I don't know if refusal of housing is, but I know it covers active and reserve military, which he is.

Veterans are a protected group in regards to employment; I would assume housing would be the same.

[TMF]

What is fair housing and how does it relate to veterans?

Fair housing is a set of principles, civil laws and regulations which provide equal access and opportunity to housing for protected class members. It impacts the property owner’s policies, practices, procedures and services in terms of advertising, application, tenant selection, amenities, and termination. Under Massachusetts fair housing law, Chapter 151B, military status, which includes veterans is a protected class. Protected classes are designated groups of people and their families that are covered under fair housing law. The military status protected class covers veterans, those individuals on active duty, and those persons enrolled in the Reserves.

Yep, this is Massachusetts law and this commie hooker broke it. She deserves a heaping portion of some bone cancer.

[Sam1]

Hopefully someone will let him stay in a house for free, and maybe.. just maybe it'll be in an area where the HOA won't threaten to sue him for flying our flag from the the porch. Most people who do this kind of bull#### have never side how the rest of the world works, troops have been there done that and that's why almost every single one of them love this country so much when they get back.

I hope that woman's car gets stolen and when she calls 911, they respond with "sorry ma'am, we don't get involved in political situations you need to write a letter to your city council which meets next month"

[wewoapsiak]

...

We all served to protect rights; even the ones we don’t believe in. Unfortunately we are not a protected group.

...

In the yahoo report they state at about 1:45 in that Vets are a protected group in Massachusetts.

[TMF]

In the yahoo report they state at about 1:45 in that Vets are a protected group in Massachusetts.

Under Massachusetts fair housing law, Chapter 151B, military status, which includes veterans is a protected class. Protected classes are designated groups of people and their families that are covered under fair housing law. The military status protected class covers veterans, those individuals on active duty, and those persons enrolled in the Reserves.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I would have been happy to have seen DaveTN's response and it end there. We should be proud of our soldiers,

not use "Protected Status" to show our praise for their service. If I were Sgt. Morgan, I wouldn't want anything to do

with living in an apartment that someone like she owned. I'm sure he will be rewarded by one of the two or three

people in the area with a better apartment, and now, for probably a better price.

That woman is a sick puppy.

[Guest ThePunisher]

She is probably Hanoi Jane's sister or at least some relative. The real enemies live in this country.

[Guest bkelm18]

.

Edited June 6, 2012 by bkelm18

[TN_Hiker]

Wow. My jaw hit the floor on just reading the title, let alone the story. I think Dave pretty well covers what I'm thinking though. Very well said.

[TMF]

I would have been happy to have seen DaveTN's response and it end there. We should be proud of our soldiers,

not use "Protected Status" to show our praise for their service. If I were Sgt. Morgan, I wouldn't want anything to do

with living in an apartment that someone like she owned.

She broke the law. I wouldn't want to live there either but that's not the point. In those liberal states there are whole communities of military hating folks. Veterans and Servicemembers shouldn't have to worry about finding housing for themselves and their families because they served their country.

I'm sure that acquiring housing in the Boston area is very competitive, and being a veteran shouldn't put you at the end of the line. She did wrong and needs to stand in court to answer for that.... and she needs some bone cancer.

[Guest drv2fst]

Many veterans are firefighters. I wonder how she would feel if they wrote her a nice letter stating that they did't feel comfortable putting out fires on her property using firefighters who served in the armed forces.

The fire department has an obligation to respond to a fire at her location as soon as they can assemble a full team of volunteers that have never served as soldiers.

It could take a while.

She should buy some extra marshmallows.

Edited June 6, 2012 by drv2fst

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

I too think Dave put the final nail in this group's overall response with the first post.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

She broke the law. I wouldn't want to live there either but that's not the point. In those liberal states there are whole communities of military hating folks. Veterans and Servicemembers shouldn't have to worry about finding housing for themselves and their families because they served their country.

I'm sure that acquiring housing in the Boston area is very competitive, and being a veteran shouldn't put you at the end of the line. She did wrong and needs to stand in court to answer for that.... and she needs some bone cancer.

You're right, they shouldn't have to concern themselves about things like this, and yes she broke the law. I

would rather the bad publicity give this woman the Hell she deserves than waste the time with the courts for

a dumb law, not because of him. Those laws, supposed to protect classes, typically just pit one class against

the other. Some end up resenting being forced to do something they don't want to do, and this is a bad example

of that, but it is a problem. The fact that the woman is taking it out on the serviceman, who is protecting her right

to be a witch, ought to tell him it isn't worth it. She should be proud of him for protecting her right. She is just

another example of liberal miscreants who don't appreciate the things others do for them. Screw that old hag!

A GI would be the first one I would rent out an apartment to. So please don't misunderstand me. It's the law I

can't stand, nothing else, and not for this situation, either.

Soldiers should be given the opportunity just like everyone else. And everyone should respect their service.

I agree with the bone cancer.

[MikePapa1]

Let me say this: I think this woman is despicable and should be publicly humiliated for her actions.

That being said, why in a country that claims the mantle of liberty, should the government force a property owner to rent their property to anyone? This is an example where agreeing with the outcome obscures the power grab of freedom. If I own property I ought to be able to rent it or not rent it to anyone I chose. That's exactly the type of liberty for which the military supposedly fights. Liberty means the liberty to do things with which I disagree.

[TMF]

I would rather the bad publicity give this woman the Hell she deserves than waste the time with the courts for

a dumb law, not because of him. Those laws, supposed to protect classes, typically just pit one class against

the other. Some end up resenting being forced to do something they don't want to do, and this is a bad example

of that, but it is a problem. The fact that the woman is taking it out on the serviceman, who is protecting her right

to be a witch, ought to tell him it isn't worth it. She should be proud of him for protecting her right. She is just

another example of liberal miscreants who don't appreciate the things others do for them. Screw that old hag!

I agree with you on principle. Yeah, these laws are BS in general and chip away at property rights, but it's these so-called enlightened folks that are so intolerant. I like seeing the tables turned on them. It makes me quite the hypocrite but not as much as this twunt.

[Mark@Sea]

Janice Roberts of Boston, MA

The best purpose the lawsuit serves is to get this creature the exposure it needs. In a righteous world, she'd have to make all her purchases online, the majority of her tenants would leave, she couldn't get her car, her cat, or her colon serviced. Short of branding a P on her forehead, this lawsuit is the next best thing to identifying this pariah.

Edited June 6, 2012 by Mark@Sea

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The one thing the lawsuit does do is expose her

for what she is. I'm glad for that. I guess using a

liberal piece of crap law against them is good

enough justification.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mcurrier]

Weather Channel Anchor Says She Was Fired Over Military Service

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/weather-channel-anchor-says-she-was-fired-over-military-service.html

People who are anti-military sicken me.

[TGO David]

Let me say this: I think this woman is despicable and should be publicly humiliated for her actions.

That being said, why in a country that claims the mantle of liberty, should the government force a property owner to rent their property to anyone? This is an example where agreeing with the outcome obscures the power grab of freedom. If I own property I ought to be able to rent it or not rent it to anyone I chose. That's exactly the type of liberty for which the military supposedly fights. Liberty means the liberty to do things with which I disagree.

As much as I detest the landlord's attitude toward the military, I agree with this statement.

[Glenn]

As much as I detest the landlord's attitude toward the military, I agree with this statement.

I agree also but the fact is the Gov. does interfere with who you rent to. If the roles were reversed in this case I bet the Gov. would be forcing the man to rent to the anti military woman.

Glenn

[Steelharp]

Let me say this: I think this woman is despicable and should be publicly humiliated for her actions.

That being said, why in a country that claims the mantle of liberty, should the government force a property owner to rent their property to anyone? This is an example where agreeing with the outcome obscures the power grab of freedom. If I own property I ought to be able to rent it or not rent it to anyone I chose. That's exactly the type of liberty for which the military supposedly fights. Liberty means the liberty to do things with which I disagree.

Well said, and agree. However... the law there does hold the military as protected, so she is breaking that law, correct? And we are to uphold the law, whether we like it or not, correct? And if we don't like it, we work to change it?